arXiv Machine Learning

Task-Aware Spectral Pruning: A Mixture-of-Masks Framework for Efficient LLM Inference

Task-Aware Spectral Pruning (TASP) is a post‑training framework that tailors sparse masks to specific tasks by calibrating module‑level spectral descriptors against task‑specific ablation effects. It constructs masks that close grouped‑query‑attention and SwiGLU dependencies, routing each user turn to a single compiled mask that remains fixed during prefill and decoding. In experiments, TASP achieves a 43% active‑FLOP reduction while preserving 97.7% of the dense BF16 performance on Llama‑3‑70B, and delivers a 1.44× speedup on an A100 80GB with INT8‑weight/BF16‑compute, reducing decode latency from 45.2 to 31.3 ms/token.

arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 11

LILA: Calibration-Free Structured Pruning of Large Language Models via Latent Spectral Geometry

LILA (Latent-Informed Layer Analysis) introduces a calibration‑free method for structured pruning of large language models by scoring neuron importance using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov distance between singular value distributions of full and neuron‑ablated feed‑forward network weight matrices. The approach requires no training, calibration data, or auxiliary networks, and outperforms existing methods such as PruneNet and SliceGPT on LLaMA‑2‑7B and Phi‑2 at various sparsity levels. After a single epoch of LoRA fine‑tuning, LILA matches heavily calibrated baselines, and a Neural Tangent Kernel analysis provides theoretical support for its spectral importance criterion. Additionally, LILA can dynamically allocate sparsity budgets, achieving state‑of‑the‑art generative preservation and revealing architectural bottlenecks at higher compression.

By Sankar Behera, Dhruv Singh, Anshika Agnihotri, Raj Kumar Choudhary, Satyadev Ahlawat, Yamuna Prasad
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 9

Beyond FLOPs: Benchmarking Real Inference Acceleration of LLM Pruning under a GEMM-Centric Taxonomy

arXiv:2606. 09080v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pruning has emerged as a dominant paradigm for accelerating large language model (LLM) inference, spanning a broad spectrum of methods that remove computation across tokens, layers, heads, dimensions, and attention patterns.

By Haozhe Hu, Hao Wu, Anhao Zhao, Longwei Ding, Peiran Yin, Yunpu Ma, Xiaoyu Shen
arXiv AI
Jul 29

How Small Can You Go? A Controlled Study of LoRA Rank, Target Modules, and Quantization Trade-offs for Text-to-SQL on a 60M-Parameter Model

arXiv:2607. 25583v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) and low-bit quantization are now standard tools for adapting language models under tight compute budgets, yet their interaction is most often studied on billion-parameter models where the design space is expensive to explore.

By Mahendra Singh Rathor, Anagheem Azzam
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 17

Beyond Static RAG: An Adaptive, Tri-Metric Routing Framework for Efficient Long-Context Inference on Commodity GPUs

The paper introduces the Tri‑Metric Router, a deterministic, training‑free policy that chooses among Raw, Neural, and Lexical pipelines for retrieval‑augmented generation on commodity GPUs. It uses three CPU‑side signals—spatial complexity, syntactic density, and type‑token ratio—to balance VRAM headroom and latency, calibrated on LongBench qasper. The method eliminates out‑of‑memory failures and improves alignment and F1 scores compared to always‑on lexical compression without extra VRAM or training costs.

By Saipraveen Vabbilisetty, Ajay Kumar Boddepalli, Deep Narayan Mishra, Shashank Kapadia, Haoan Wang, Anupriya Sharma
arXiv AI
Jun 26

SharQ: Bridging Activation Sparsity and FP4 Quantization for LLM Inference

arXiv:2606. 26587v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Low-bit floating-point formats and semi-structured sparsity are increasingly supported by modern accelerators, yet combining them for LLM activation compression remains challenging: activations contain input-dependent outliers that dominate block scales in FP4 quantization, and directly applying N:M sparsity masks discards moderate values, coupling sparsification loss with quantization error.

By Haoqian Meng, Yilun Luo, Yafei Zhao, Wenyuan Liu, Huaqing Zheng, Xindian Ma, Peng Zhang
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 10

Prune Once: Retraining-Free Task-Agnostic Pruning for Vision-Language Models

arXiv:2608. 06901v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) have achieved remarkable generalization across diverse multimodal tasks through large-scale pre-training, yet their rapidly increasing computational and memory requirements pose significant challenges for deployment in constrained environments.

By Minseok Kang, Hyunwoo Kim, Chanyoung Kim, Minwoo Kim, Jaekoo Lee, Dahuin Jung
arXiv AI
Sep 11

Scaling Post-Training Ternarisation to Qwen3-8B Capability Retention, Reproduction, Lossless Packing, and Packed Execution

The paper reports a large‑scale post‑training ternarisation of the Qwen3 language model, extending a conversion pipeline from the 4B to the 8B variant. Using KOTMS rotation, E2M‑ATQ adaptive ternarisation, and GPTQ‑style error compensation, the authors achieve a 1.361× perplexity ratio across three corpora and retain 78.5% of the FP16 accuracy on zero‑shot tasks, with the 8B model outperforming the 4B by 8.9 percentage points. The study also demonstrates lossless lattice‑aware packing, producing an 8.24 GiB checkpoint that preserves perplexity, and shows that direct packed execution can reach 15.52 tokens/s in 7.35 GiB, though packed GEMV remains slower than FP16 cuBLAS.

By Anirudh Malik, M Sparsh Mehra, Poojith Devan
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 28

How Small Can You Go? A Controlled Study of LoRA Rank, Target Modules, and Quantization Trade-offs for Text-to-SQL on a 60M-Parameter Model

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) and low-bit quantization are now standard tools for adapting language models under tight compute budgets, yet their interaction is most often studied on billion-parameter models where the design space is expensive to explore. We ask a complementary question: on a specific, fully reproducible 60M-parameter encoder-decoder model (T5-small) and a single-table text-to-SQL benchmark (WikiSQL), how much task accuracy does each efficiency knob actually cost?